Can a liberal defend their beliefs on gay marriage without resorting to insults, etc.?

Question

This is not a yes-or-no question. I'd just like to see a liberal explain what they believe and why without resorting to insults.

Great answers all. That's what I wanted. It is interesting though how many times people said something like "I don't affliate myself with any particuliar policital genre." Translation: "I'm a liberal."

Although, I disagree with the argument given (for example, the equal protection argument... equal protection has nothing to do with gay marriage because gay people have the equal right to marry someone of the opposite sex.), I'm going to choose as best answer the single individual who didn't resort to insults and also didn't resort to pointing out that that didn't resort to insults.

Answer 1

I am not sure I understand why you are under the impression that because a person believes that two people who are in love should be given the opportunity to be connected through matrimony is necessarily a cheerleader for the gay community. I think that all someone who is in favor of loving persons connecting through matrimony is in favor of is the confirmation that marriage is for people in love. Not necessarily heterosexuals, bi-sexuals, or homo-sexuals. To support the idea that something as beautiful as a lifetime committment to one another can only be reserved for one specific type of couple is, to me, more bizarre than I can comprehend. There is no language in any of the bills that says you are required to like anyone in the gay community, or that you even are required to affiliate with anyone in the gay community, only that they can commit to one another in a
recognized ceremony.

Answer 2

Hmmmmm ... how about this...

I as a male could walk up to a total female stranger on the street, ask her to marry me, go and marry her and it's ok, that's considered the "sanctity of marriage". She would be able to decide if I live or die if I were to become ill the very next day and unable to make my own decision, she would get my Social Security death benefits and anything I own not listed in a will to someone else... even though she were a complete stranger.

I could go out and do this again and again and every time that woman is considered my wife and since we are a man and a woman our marriage is sanctified, at least in a legal sense and that's what we're talking about here, right? Legal marriage, not religious marriage.

Whereas two people of the same sex who have lived together for twenty years and have shared a life together, made mutual decisions, made mutual purchases, shared the same bed, been through tough times and good times together, laughed and cried together, get nothing.

If one of them gets ill the other has no legal rights, yet my "stranger wife " would.

And that's ok?

Which one of these scenarios show the real "sanctity of marriage"?

One question I would like to ask, do you know what the definition of "liberal" is?
According to the dictionary it's "open minded"

I guess I am a liberal and I think I'm proud to be one considering what the opposite is.

Answer 3

If a country that has separation of church and state, why does the government limit who should and should not be married? Heterosexual or gay, a marriage is a commitment between two individuals. If this is a question of religion, then the government should not interfere. If this is a question of legal rights, shouldn't legislature be only concern with laws that prevent its citizens from causing harm to others? US laws should be about ensuring the rights to life, freedom, and the pursuit of happiness. How does a gay marriage endanger these rights?

We cannot stop gay people from being gay. It's who they are biologically (yes, biologically, there are scientific evidence for this. People have been gay since the ancient Greeks and before). Why should their rights be limited because of something they are born with and cannot change, especially when they are not harming anyone by having the right to be married?

Answer 4

Gay marriage is such a sore issue with conservatives soley based on their religious beliefs....that being said, marriages (unions) have been around since BEFORE the bible was even an idea. The idea of Marriage (or unions) is a MAN MADE concept alone! This was done wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy back when, when humans were coming out of the hunter gatherer/roaming stage into a more stable agricultural people, for survival purposes! (not just survival of genes)....fast forward to 21st century.......this "SURVIVAL" is not required anymore...there are no saber toothed tigers, or wild beasts to confront etc.
Religion states Marriage is of GOD....I say Love is of GOD....
I Could care less if two men or two women want to get married, sleep together, etc...it doesn't affect me! If you feel it is a SIN against GOD...then let GOD take care of it....not YOU! To state other than is to deny FREE WILL....which is (in a religious sense) our birth right...
With the divorce rate the way it is in this country.....you think that stopping Gays from marriage is bad for the institution of marriage? That is very hypocritical. How about you religious zealots practice what you preach...."DO UNTO OTHERS AS YOU WOULD HAVE OTHERS DO UNTO YOU". Cased closed!!!

Answer 5

I have many times (though I don't like to label myself "liberal"...I do lean left, but I need no label). First, I don’t view love as an immoral emotion. All people, gay and straight, want and need to be loved. One way of expressing that love is to announce it to the world and make it legal in the eyes of the law of the land. The argument, “It degrades the sanctity of marriage” holds no water with me. There are plenty of men and women, conservative and liberal, who degrade the sanctity of marriage by having extra marital affairs, beating their spouses, molesting children, etc. Just because one is straight does not mean that they are better at marriage than one who is gay. Another problem I have with this argument is the fact that those who are against gay marriage usually back up their argument with Leviticus. I do not support theocracy, so I do not support arguing a political matter with biblical talking points. I have more, but I’m not sure you were even expecting a rational answer and perhaps you just wished to bash people who disagree with you, so I will end with what I have.

Answer 6

That's easy. I have been trying to stay civil in all of my answers. Gay people are as committed in a relationship as married couples are. The only reason they want marriage is so they have some rights as a married couple and they could accomplish that with just a simple civil union and not a marriage. They want to be able to insure their loved ones, make health and end of life decisions if necessary, have the right to inherit and to adopt children if they wish. In a committed relationship they are the same as anyone else. Maybe more so. With all the screaming the religious right does my thought is, defend your position without quoting the Bible. Without the rhetoric about Liberals. Tell me how the union of gays would effect the union of men & women.

Answer 7

OK you did ask ! This is America we have freedom . Or do we ? If the right to same sex marriage is denied . This in its simplest form is un-American . The priest has the right to refuse as well so if there is no priest to hold the marriage . this would make the whole thing pointless. Can a Conservative answer this without a person loosing their freedoms ? Separation of Church and state was placed for this very reason . Churches and religion regardless of your worship . Would result in taking a persons rights . ( No Matter how Misguided )

Answer 8

This is a very good question and if there is a liberal out there who wants to play stupid about it, here is a link to a non-professional debate on it. Note how Semidil T tried several different ways to find solutions to what they want, but basically only got back "put this in your sanctity of marriage and smoke it..."

http://quellious-collective.com/quellious/forums/viewtopic.php?t=7667

There only real argument is because some abuse the concept and others make mistakes with it that we should just trash everything about it and let them run wild doing anything that that want with it. What they really want to do is hurt the people who they believe persecuted them and that is about it, you hurt me, so I am going to find something you value and trash it and see how you feel.

I could go into this a lot deeper stating reason why they are only hurting themselves with all of this, but just on face value that is wrong, so who can prove it right?

John B.

Answer 9

I don't consider myself in any political genre including liberal, because of there are things I disagree with in about any set of values they have established out there.

About the defense of gay marriage though, I'd say that there is no reason why to ban it unless there's some reason you think it should be illegal, and I think that there is no reason for it to be illegal. Love whom you like, regardless of gender. To ban it is to say that you're try to rival the nature of all the people that are homosexual. If you ban marriage that just stops them from feeling legitimate when they do find their true match, but it won't stop them from doing everything in their power to be with the one they love.

I once was homophobic but had a friend come out of the closet and that changed my viewpoints to what it is today. Maybe something like that will do the same for you.

Answer 10

ok well I am not a liberal but if you want my views I will give them, hell you have no choice your going to get them anyways lol

I personally am not a huge fan of any marriage, but hey what ever floats your boat I guess. Same with gay marriage, at least they are making some kinda commitment. Marriage is a thing of religion to me, so the government should have a limited role in it.

Now to the constitutional amendment banning gay marriage I am against that for one simple reason, the constitution is to secure rights and freedoms, not limit what one can do. If it was changed to a federal law against gay marriage, I might be convinced to support that, but its not the type of thing that should in in the constitution.

hope I made seance

Answer 11

Yes.

If two people are in a stable, long term relationship then they deserve the same legal rights as any other couple regardless of their sexual orientation. Also why should I mind who someone else is marrying, they aren't marrying me! I would now like to see someone come up with a counter argument to this which doesn't contain a reference to thier religious beliefs... or by resulting to insults.